"Libel is injury to reputation. Words, pictures or cartoons that expose a person to public hatred, shame, disgrace or ridicule, or induce an ill opinion of a person, are libelous." (The AP Libel Manual)

* The statement was false.

* It was a statement of fact (not opinion).

* The statement was published.

* The statement cannot be proved false.

Provable truth is the only complete and unconditional defense against libel.

But proving truth can be difficult. Providing that what you published was the whole truth is even harder.

* The statute of limitations has expired.

The time a plaintiff has to sue for libel varies by state. I believe it is two years after publication in Iowa, Illinois and Minnesota, but three years in Wisconsin.

* The statement was privileged.

Public officials acting in their official capacities have absolute privilege to say anything.

Journalists have qualified privilege to provide a full and fair account of anything said during an official proceeding.

* The statement was an expression of opinion rather than a statement of fact.

Editors should be sure that opinion pieces are clearly labeled and their assertions supported.

This is a tricky area, and I suspect online forms such as blogs are going to make it even trickier.

* The person suing is either a public official or a public figure.

If so, the plaintiff has to prove the statement was made with actual malice (you knew it was false but published it anyway) or reckless disregard for whether it was true or false.

If the plaintiff is not a public official or public figure, he or she only needs to provide negligence -- you didn't do your job appropriately in checking out the information.

* Recognize the danger zones.

Think carefully about any negative statements about a person in a story. These might include accusations or even implications that the person committed a crime (before being found guilty in court), engaged in undesirable business practices, had a loathsome disease or was immoral.

Other danger areas include making someone look ridiculous or dredging up irrelevant information from the person's past. (Ah, but exactly what is irrelevant ...?)

* Watch for juxtapositions, such as second references within a story or the use of photos that could create an unintended (and damaging) impression.

* Make changes and write headlines carefully.

Be sure not to change meanings in text or to create misleading headlines -- or cutlines or teasers or anything else that editors write.

Headlines can be especially damaging because so many more people read the headline than read the story, and courts may consider headlines separately from stories.

* Check the sources.

If a story includes a source who does not hold absolute privilege and who says something negative about someone else, you need to triple-check for both credibility of that source and confirmation from other sources.

Sources can and do use journalists to "get at" an enemy -- leaving you liable for their vendetta.

* Check for the response.

If the story contains negative statements about a person or group, every effort must be made to give that person or group an opportunity to respond.

Your best bet, if in fact the story has to run at all without a response, is to detail what those opportunities were -- not only out of fairness (important though that is) but also to legally cover your backside.

* Develop a procedure for responding to someone who says (screams, usually) that he or she was libeled.

Short version: This is why your company's lawyer gets the really big bucks. Call the lawyer pronto, and involve him or her in whatever communications ensue with the person claiming libel.

Prompt and clear retractions or corrections do not take away the libel -- but they often take away the person's anger or at least assuage it, making him or her less likely to sue. Even if you do wind up in court and lose, you likely will have to pay less in damages than without the correction.

In particular, avoid two common mistakes that journalists make in dealing with someone enraged by something they published.

* Intrusion into a person's seclusion or solitude, or into private affairs.

Examples include forcing your way into a source's home or going through personal papers to get a story.

* Public disclosure of embarrassing private facts, such as revealing a person's notorious past when it has no bearing on the present.

This is a problem area for libel, too, but again, privacy invasion is easier to prove in court.

* Misappropriation of a person's name or likeness for personal advantage.

This one usually applies to celebrities or public figures. They have trouble winning libel cases, but invasion of privacy claims are, once again, easier.

* Copyright was established in the original U.S. Constitution, so it predates the First Amendment.

Basically, it gives authors the right to control the reproduction and use of their creative expressions.

That is, the person who published the material owns it, and it cannot be used by someone else without payment. To do so would be plagiarism, which has been a professional death trap for a whole slew of journalists recently.

* Most journalism is considered "work for hire."

That is, although an individual wrote the story or took the photo, once it is published, the copyright is held by the company for which that individual works.

For instance, once Jayne's editorial columns are published in the Daily Iowan, the DI -- not Jayne -- is the copyright holder. (In fact, Jayne would need to get permission from the DI publisher to sell her column to any other outlet.)

* Historically, the law has covered materials fixed in tangible form, such as on a piece of paper.

But the law has been extended to cover digital material, including online stories.

* The purpose and nature of the use, in particular whether it was intended to generate personal (or company) profit.

* The nature of the copyrighted work, such as its length, whether it is fact or fiction, the effort that went into creating it and its availability.

* The amount of the total work that was used. The more that was copied, the weaker the fair use defense.

* The effect the use will have on the value or profit-making potential of the original work.

This generally is the most important factor. The issue often is whether the copy will have the same function as the original and therefore compete with it, or even supplant it, in the marketplace.